A cross-sectional survey of nursing students' patient safety knowledge.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge provides a foundation for safe and effective nursing practice. However, most previous studies have focused on exploring nursing students' self-reported perceptions of, or confidence in, their level of patient safety knowledge, rather than examining their actual levels of knowledge. OBJECTIVE: The overarching objective of this study was to examine final year nursing students' levels of knowledge about key patient safety concepts. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was used for this study. Data collection was undertaken during 2018 using a web-based patient safety quiz with 45 multiple choice questions informed by the Patient Safety Competency Framework for Nursing Students. A Modified Angoff approach was used to establish a pass mark or 'cut score' for the quiz. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Nursing students enrolled in the final year of a pre-registration nursing program in Australia or New Zealand were invited to participate in the study. RESULTS: In total, 2011 final year nursing students from 23 educational institutions completed the quiz. Mean quiz scores were 29.35/45 or 65.23% (SD 5.63). Participants achieved highest scores in the domains of person-centred care and therapeutic communication, and lowest scores for infection prevention and control and medication safety. Based on the pass mark of 67.3% determined by the Modified Angoff procedure, 44.7% of students (n = 899) demonstrated passing performance on the quiz. For eight of the institutions, less than half of their students achieved a passing mark. CONCLUSIONS: Given the pivotal role that nurses play in maintaining patient safety, the results from this quiz raise important questions about the preparation of nursing students for safe and effective clinical practice. The institutional results also suggest the need for increased curricula attention to patient safety.

Economic evaluation of simulated and traditional clinical placements in occupational therapy education.

INTRODUCTION: This economic evaluation complements results of the randomised controlled trial that established non-inferiority of the learning outcomes of a one-week simulated clinical placement (SCP) in occupational therapy qualifying degrees in comparison to an equivalent traditional clinical placement (TCP). This companion study presents detailed cost analyses of two placement alternatives and a cost-benefit study to assess the value for money of SCP. An economic evaluation of simulated versus traditional placements has not previously been conducted in Australia. METHODS: Nine SCP/TCP rounds were conducted by six Australian universities. Costs were collected using study-specific instruments. Public health sector costs were sourced from available literature. Willingness-to-pay for SCP/TCP was estimated using both a Discrete Choice Experiment and a Contingent Valuation method. These methods were employed to assess a comparative 'value' of SCP/TCP from the perspective of heads of occupational therapy departments (N = 28), who were asked to put a monetary value on the broader range of benefits associated with SCP/TCP. RESULTS: From the universities' perspective the average cost per student ranged from AUD$460 to AUD$1511 for simulated and AUD$144 to AUD$1112 for traditional placement. From the health care sector perspective, the difference in costs favoured simulated placements for four implementations and traditional placements for five. In the Discrete Choice Experiment respondents preferred traditional rather than simulated placement and would pay additional AUD$533. The estimated monetary value of simulated placements from a contingent valuation ranged from AUD$200 to AUD$1600. CONCLUSIONS: For universities that procure TCPs predominately at public health care facilities and sustain high administrative overheads, the SCP program could be a cost-saving alternative. From a broader value-for-money perspective, respondents favoured TCP over SCP, yet placed importance on placement availability and opportunity to demonstrate competence for students during the placement. Results should be interpreted with caution and further research with larger sample sizes is required.

Placement replacement: A conceptual framework for designing simulated clinical placement in occupational therapy.

Simulation is increasingly used to supplement clinical placement in preregistration health professional programs. However, there are no conceptual frameworks to guide the design of these learning experiences when replacing a clinical placement. In the present study, the conceptual framework for simulated clinical placements (CF-SCP) is presented. Evolving from an iterative process of synthesizing learning and simulation theory, findings from the empirical literature, and the perspectives and ideas from experts in occupational therapy practice, education and simulation-based learning, the CF-SCP aligns principles and processes of workplace and simulation learning. The application of the CF-SCP is described in the context of a 1 week full-time SCP. The CF-SCP provides a structure for organizing, understanding, and applying the principles and processes to design a simulated placement to be a "placement replacement" experience. Articulating a conceptual framework for the design of simulated placement experiences to replace actual clinical placement hours in the allied health sector is important if these experiences are to be tested for validity, efficacy, and transferability to a range of occupational therapy practice areas and other health disciplines.

Simulated versus traditional occupational therapy placements: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Professional practise placements in occupational therapy education are critical to ensuring graduate competence. Australian occupational therapy accreditation standards allow up to 200 of a mandated 1000 placement hours to include simulation-based learning. There is, however, minimal evidence about the effectiveness of simulation-based placements compared to traditional placements in occupational therapy. We evaluated whether occupational therapy students completing a 40 hour (one week block) Simulated Clinical Placement (SCP) attained non-inferior learning outcomes to students attending a 40 hour Traditional Clinical Placement (TCP). METHODS: A pragmatic, non-inferiority, assessor-blinded, multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving students from six Australian universities was conducted. Statistical power analysis estimated a required sample of 425. Concealed random allocation was undertaken with a 1:1 ratio within each university. Students were assigned to SCP or TCP in one of three settings: vocational rehabilitation, mental health or physical rehabilitation. SCP materials were developed, manualised and staff training provided. TCPs were in equivalent practice areas. Outcomes were assessed using a standardised examination, unit grades, the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised and student confidence survey. A generalised estimating equation approach was used to assess non-inferiority of the SCP to the TCP. RESULTS: Of 570 randomised students (84% female), 275 attended the SCP and 265 the TCP (n = 540, 94.7% retention). There were no significant differences between the TCP and SCP on (i) examination results (marginal mean difference 1.85, 95% CI: 0.46-3.24; P = 0.087); (ii) unit score (mean (SD) SCP: 71.9 (8.8), TCP: 70.34 (9.1); P = 0.066); or (iii) placement fail rate, assessed using the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised (100% passed both groups). CONCLUSION: Students can achieve equivalent learning outcomes in a 40 hour simulated placement to those achieved in a 40 hour traditional placement. These findings provide assurance to students, educators and professional accreditation bodies that simulation can be embedded in occupational therapy education with good effect.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of embedded simulation in occupational therapy clinical practice education: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical placements are a critical component of the training for health professionals such as occupational therapists. However, with growing student enrolments in professional education courses and workload pressures on practitioners, it is increasingly difficult to find sufficient, suitable placements that satisfy program accreditation requirements. The professional accrediting body for occupational therapy in Australia allows up to 200 of the mandatory 1000 clinical placement hours to be completed via simulation activities, but evidence of effectiveness and efficiency for student learning outcomes is lacking. Increasingly placement providers charge a fee to host students, leading educators to consider whether providing an internal program might be a feasible alternative for a portion of placement hours. Economic analysis of the incremental costs and benefits of providing a traditional versus simulated placement is required to inform decision-making. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a pragmatic, non-inferiority, single-blind, multicentre, two-group randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an embedded economic analysis. The RCT will compare a block of 40 hours of simulated placement (intervention) with a 40-hour block of traditional placement (comparator), with a focus on student learning outcomes and delivery costs. Six universities will instigate the educational intervention within their respective occupational therapy courses, randomly assigning their cohort of students (1:1 allocation) to the simulated or traditional clinical placements. The primary outcome is achievement of professional behaviours (e.g. communication, clinical reasoning) as assessed by a post-placement written examination. Secondary outcomes include proportions passing the placement assessed using the Student Practice Evaluation Form-Revised, changes in student confidence pre-/post-placement, student and educator evaluation of the placement experience and cost-effectiveness of simulated versus traditional clinical placements. Comprehensive cost data will be collected for both the simulated and traditional placement programs at each site for economic evaluation. DISCUSSION: Use of simulation in health-related fields like occupational therapy is common, but these activities usually relate to brief opportunities for isolated skill development. The simulated clinical placement evaluated in this trial is less common because it encapsulates a 5-day block of integrated activities, designed and delivered in a manner intended to emulate best-practice placement experiences. The planned study is rare due to inclusion of an economic analysis that aims to provide valuable information about the relationship between costs and outcomes across participating sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616001339448 . Registered 26 September 2016.

Tag team simulation: An innovative approach for promoting active engagement of participants and observers during group simulations.

Active participation in immersive simulation experiences can result in technical and non-technical skill enhancement. However, when simulations are conducted in large groups, maintaining the interest of observers so that they do not disengage from the learning experience can be challenging. We implemented Tag Team Simulation with the aim of ensuring that both participants and observers had active and integral roles in the simulation. In this paper we outline the features of this innovative approach and provide an example of its application to a pain simulation. Evaluation was conducted using the Satisfaction with Simulation Experience Scale. A total of 444 year nursing students participated from a population of 536 (response rate 83%). Cronbach's alpha for the Scale was .94 indicating high internal consistency. The mean satisfaction score for participants was 4.63 compared to 4.56 for observers. An independent sample t test revealed no significant difference between these scores (t (300) = -1.414, p = 0.16). Tag team simulation is an effective approach for ensuring observers' and participants' active involvement during group-based simulations and one that is highly regarded by students. It has the potential for broad applicability across a range of leaning domains both within and beyond nursing.

Clinical simulation in Australia and New Zealand: through the lens of an advisory group.

Across Australia, innovations in simulation to enhance learning in nursing have been occurring for three decades and nursing is, and needs to be, a leading player in simulation knowledge diffusion. However, expertise is unevenly distributed across health services and education providers. Rather than build on the expertise and achievements of others, there is a tendency for resource duplication and for trial and error problem solving, in part related to a failure to communicate achievements for the benefits of the professional collective. For nursing to become a Leader in the use of simulation and drive ongoing development, as well as conducting high quality research and evaluation, academics need to collaborate, aggregate best practice in simulation learning, and disseminate that knowledge to educators working in health services and higher education sectors across the whole of Australia and New Zealand. To achieve this strategic intent, capacity development principles and committed action are necessary. In mid 2010 the opportunity to bring together nurse educators with simulation learning expertise within Australia and New Zealand became a reality. The Council of Deans of Nursing and Midwifery (CDNM) Australia and New Zealand decided to establish an expert reference group to reflect on the state of Australian nursing simulation, to pool expertise and to plan ways to share best practice knowledge on simulation more widely. This paper reflects on the achievements of the first 18 months since the group's establishment and considers future directions for the enhancement of simulation learning practice, research and development in Australian nursing.